RFR: 8139652: Mutator refinement processing should take the oldest dirty card buffer

[Kim Barrett]

> On Mar 19, 2020, at 10:42 AM, Stefan Johansson <stefan.johansson at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Kim,
> 
> On 2020-03-19 03:28, Kim Barrett wrote:
>>> On Mar 18, 2020, at 7:05 AM, Thomas Schatzl <thomas.schatzl at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 3, 2020, at 9:32 PM, Kim Barrett <kim.barrett at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please review this change to the handling of completed buffers by mutator
>>>>> threads.  […]
>>>>> 
>>>>> CR:
>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139652
>>>>> 
>>>>> Webrev:
>>>>> https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kbarrett/8139652/open.00/
>>>>> 
>>>>> Testing
>>>>> mach5 tier1-5 along with changes for JDK-8239825 and JDK-8139652.
>>>> The original webrev was based on JDK-8239825 and JDK-8240133.  The
>>>> push and backout of JDK-8240133 has made that webrev no longer apply
>>>> cleanly.  So here's a new, up to date (as of this morning) webrev:
>>>> https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kbarrett/8139652/open.01/
>>>> Tested with mach5 tier1-5 along with change for JDK-8239825 (which
>>>> hasn't been pushed yet).
>>> - g1DirtyCardQueue.cpp:544: indentation of "fully_processed" parameter
>>> 
>>> - I suggest to undo that line break in the assert 547 - the resulting string is like 83 chars.
>>> 
>>> Looks good otherwise. I do not need a re-review for above tiny changes.
>> Thanks.  I’ve made those changes.
>> 
>> New webrev (which no longer needs to be applied on top of separate change for JDK-8239825, which has been pushed).
>> 
>> https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kbarrett/8139652/open.02/
> Looks good,
> Stefan

Thanks.